This is true for any NFL QB. Depth wins championships......true, but that is not true for the QB position. Backup QB's don't win championships...show me how many backup QBs that have come into play and have won Superbowl?[/quote]

Staubach, Bradshaw, Plunkett, Jeff Hostetler, Doug Williams, Trent Dilfer, and Tom Brady were all backups who supplanted starters at some point in the season and went on to win the superbowl. That's about what 1/6 of all Superbowl winning QB's?

There are also many who were backups that led teams to the Superbowl but didn't win.

I remember clearly the years Plunkett took over for Pastorini/Wilson, Doug Williams took over for Jay Schroeder, Trent Dilfer took over for Tony Banks, and Tom Brady took over for Drew Bledsoe. Those all took place at varying times in the season. With Williams it was for the playoffs basically only. Hostetler took over for Simms very late in the season as well. Brady took over early for Bledsoe (about a quarter of the way in). Dilfer took over for Banks after a couple of weeks, as Banks wasn't performing and they needed somebody to just manage the game and not a guy who would try to force things and created turnovers like Banks did. Plunkett was stuck in the Al Davis revolving wheel of QB's. Jay Schroeder lost the confidence of his teammates and coach and kept coming out with injuries. Gibbs finally said "enough" and just put Williams in and decided to just run with it for better or worse.[/quote]

I will give you Williams, Hostetler .... maybe Dilfer..... but stop it with the Brady, Bradshaw, or Staubach. The other thing you may notice is in the modern day NFL where QB plays a huge role its not happening.

Matt Flynn has started 2 games, I would prefer to take the gamble he won't be one of those 1/7 backup (if that, personally I don't accept all your QBs) who won't win the SB and allocate that money to someone who will see the field.

If you want to over pay a backup QB lets bring one in with actual experience.

[/quote]

What do you mean you'll "give me" Williams, Hostetler, and MAYBE Dilfer, but forget the others? The question was what backup QB's came in and won Superbowls. All of the ones I listed started the season in which they won the Superbowl as CLEAR 2nd string QB's. They got beat out for the job. Brady, Bradshaw, and Staubach were all second stringers at least a ways into the season (farther than you think apparently). Craig Morton was starting in Dallas above Staubach. Yes... Morton was the starter, but was a turnover machine, just as he was in Denver. Staubach took over. Bradshaw couldn't ever win the starting job, because Chuck Noll thought he was a moron. That's a fact. The starter's name is not coming to me, but he is remembered as the first starting black QB of the modern era and was a pretty steady guy, but he also had turnover problems, but Bradshaw could never win the job out of training camp and was not anointed the starter until winning the Super Bowl that year, and then he was... and won 3 more. Brady was a late round pick and was liked by coaches but they felt that Bledsoe gave them a better chance to win. He didn't come in until a fourth way through the season. Check your facts. You seem to follow me and question every post I make. I don't pull things out of my butt. I actually know a lot about football believe it or not.

Backup QB's are hugely important, but I don't think Flynn should be it. He doesn't really fit this offense, never has to begin with, and he'd be far from the first backup QB out there to be hankering for a starting job.

You don't cut the backup qb to save $1-2 million. Flynn has a preseason under his belt he is in the meetings, knows the system and the coaches knows why they have.

If they trade Flynn then it is because they feel they gain something by doing so

If they cut Flynn it is because they don't think he can come in and win games and they think alternates are better

It will not be to save $1-2 million. If the saving was $10 million then I would listen to this argument but you need a backup that can win.

Can you imagine getting rid if Flynn have RW injured the first game next season and then go 3-13 meanwhile see Flynn take some team to a winning record? Someone would get fired if this happened.

Funny paying Flynn that money and make him a starter was not an issue. Now as a backup suddenly he is overpaid due to lack of experience. He was simply beat by what we all hope is the franchise qb for a long time to come....

SeahawkGeoff wrote:Matt Flynn 3/18/2012: Signed a three-year, $19.5 million contract. The deal contains $10 million guaranteed -- a $6 million signing bonus, Flynn's 2012 base salary, and $2 million of his second-year salary. Another $5 million is available through escalators. An additional $2 million worth of incentives is available, but is "unlikely to be earned." 2012: $2 million, 2013: $5.25 million, 2014: $6.25 million, 2015: Free Agent

Matt Moore 2.75 million

Jason Campbell Signed a one-year, $3.5 million contract. The deal included a $2 million signing bonus. Another $1 million is available through incentives based on playing time. 2012: $1.4 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus), 2013: Free Agent

Tjack 2012: $1.75 million, 2013: Free Agent

If I figured it right Seattle is paying him 6 million next year because of the guaranteed money, I might be wrong. Somebody correct me if I am. Campbell got payed 5.5 Million with signing bonus and there's incentives. I doubt he'll take much less then that next year. Tjack would be logical from a financial and playbook stand point, but why sign Flynn over Tjack in the first place. I think Carroll got what he needed out of Tjack and would only prosue this line is we could get draft pick(s) for Flynn. Matt Moore isn't a bad choice, he'll probably cost about the same as this year (2.75) with a signing bonus plus incentives. The biggest thing I would mention is Flynn as are Back up will have had one year under are offense in the books and be part of the team. I get what your saying but it's not going to change much if at all the budget or cap (Moore or Campbell), maybe a little (Tjack).

So still think we should cut Flynn and sign Campbell and save a million or two.... Watching tonight's game and I am not really impressed and this is after practicing with the starters all week....

SeahawkGeoff wrote:Matt Flynn 3/18/2012: Signed a three-year, $19.5 million contract. The deal contains $10 million guaranteed -- a $6 million signing bonus, Flynn's 2012 base salary, and $2 million of his second-year salary. Another $5 million is available through escalators. An additional $2 million worth of incentives is available, but is "unlikely to be earned." 2012: $2 million, 2013: $5.25 million, 2014: $6.25 million, 2015: Free Agent

Matt Moore 2.75 million

Jason Campbell Signed a one-year, $3.5 million contract. The deal included a $2 million signing bonus. Another $1 million is available through incentives based on playing time. 2012: $1.4 million (+ $100,000 workout bonus), 2013: Free Agent

Tjack 2012: $1.75 million, 2013: Free Agent

If I figured it right Seattle is paying him 6 million next year because of the guaranteed money, I might be wrong. Somebody correct me if I am. Campbell got payed 5.5 Million with signing bonus and there's incentives. I doubt he'll take much less then that next year. Tjack would be logical from a financial and playbook stand point, but why sign Flynn over Tjack in the first place. I think Carroll got what he needed out of Tjack and would only prosue this line is we could get draft pick(s) for Flynn. Matt Moore isn't a bad choice, he'll probably cost about the same as this year (2.75) with a signing bonus plus incentives. The biggest thing I would mention is Flynn as are Back up will have had one year under are offense in the books and be part of the team. I get what your saying but it's not going to change much if at all the budget or cap (Moore or Campbell), maybe a little (Tjack).

So still think we should cut Flynn and sign Campbell and save a million or two.... Watching tonight's game and I am not really impressed and this is after practicing with the starters all week....

I'm not sure if the question was posted towards me as you used my quote or just as a reference about contracts , but just for record, I never thought we should cut him.